The Bible can be seen as an anthology of Jewish religious literature written over a period of about 1,400 years. Those who think that it was dictated by God, and inerrant try to find consistencies that do not exist.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 St. Paul writes, "Let no man deceive you be any means; for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition."

The "man of sin" is often identified as the antichrist, but St. Paul - who really did write most of the epistles attributed to him - and the author of the two epistles traditionally attributed to St. John may have been thinking of two different people.

In the Odyssey by Homer, and in the Old Testament the Greek concept of Hades and the Israelite concept of Sheol are virtually identical. They are fairly dreary, spooky places where the souls of the dead go. There are no posthumous rewards and punishments in either.

By the first century AD the Greeks did believe in posthumous rewards and punishments that began immediately after death. Most of the Jews - the Sadducees were an exception - believed in a resurrection of the dead and a final judgment at sometime in the future.

In the New Testament the writers somewhat awkwardly try to combine these concepts, but they are different. In The Divine Comedy Dante says that at the final judgement the souls in Heaven and Hell attend the judgement, and then return to where they were. The judgment, however, seems to be redundant.

The popular concept of Hell seems to be that it is a vast prison where Satan is the prison warden, and the devils are prison guards. This concept does not appear in the Bible. One can interpret Biblical mentions of Hell as meaning that those who do not go to Heaven pass into oblivion. This is what atheists believe anyway.

 

Jews and Arabs share a common heritage of only a few thousand years old. This has been scientifically known for over a decade, after DNA experiments were conducted.

The King James translation was performed by 47 scholars, and were instructed to make it conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ordained clergy. Were they all divinely inspired, or just following orders ?

The New Testament was translated from the Greek Version, and the old testament was translated from Hebrew. The bible has been translated a number of times, it is therefore all down to interpretation. Not really a solid foundation for something which is supposed to represent the ultimate truth.

 

I know I'm jumping into this a little late, but why is this becoming a religious debate? If we are talking about the legalization of homosexual marriage, then I really don't see why one religion needs to weigh in on it.

Forgive me if I seem biased in my examples, I am a resident, and always have been, of the United States. I have also always identified myself as a moderate to right wing conservative. Because of which I stand behind the Constitution and the beliefs set forth in the Declaration of Independence. Mainly the first amendment, giving all citizens the freedom of, and in some cases from, religion. I also believe that every human being has certain inalienable rights which include life, liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness. Furthermore, I believe in the separation of Church and State, mainly for its original purpose of keeping the state out of the church.

With that being said, I see absolutely NO reason that homosexual marriages should NOT be legalized. Where I have the problem is it being forced into the churches that do not recognize that lifestyle as normal and healthy. I personally have no objections to it. If two people are in love and want to join in a civil union, whether they are a man and a woman, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, then there should be no law to stop them from doing so, this is a nation of tolerance. Furthermore, to give one group of partners certain privileges, but not another, is blatant discrimination.

My two cents, take it for what it's worth.

 

Exactly! It is unconstitutional to keep homosexuals from getting married. I don't think they should try and force the churches either otherwise they're neglecting the churches's constitutional rights. The first amendment is already being stepped on. Free political speech is now a felony wherever the president or his selected speakers are addressing the public. The bill that was passed was, I believe H.R 377.

 

The Jews and Arabs are Semites, as are the Assyrians and Chaldeans. The Assyrians created the Assyrian Empire. The Chaldeans created the Babylonian Empire. Both of these are mentioned in the Old Testament. Each by turns conquered the Jews. They are considered to be distinct, but kindred people's.

Currently the Assyrians and the Chaldeans each have their unique variety of Christianity. For several thousand years they lived in what is now Iraq. Because of the turmoil there many have left, and many of these have moved to the United States.

 

It is fact that no on wants to suffer.

 

look up the words, historical linguistics

 

and the suffering is braught to us buy what?

 

I agree that support for gay marriage is increasing. That is not the point of my objection. The lines on those two graphs are definitely moving in the right directions, and I do not think anyone could credibly argue against that.

What I am saying is that the lines are far too low (against) and far too high (in favor) on the vertical scale. The graphs are skewed.

If 27% nationally were reported by Gallup as tolerating gay marriage five years ago, the "real" number was probably more like 15%, or even lower. If Gallup is reporting 54% in favor today, the "real" number is probably more like 40%, or even lower. The two lines in the graph are moving in the right direction, but they have not converged, and may not do so for years.

That is why gay marriage is being trounced in general referenda, and will be trounced for the foreseeable future.

The handlers who rig Obama's teleprompter fed him the "I've grown up" speech too soon. Biden has it right. Obama has it wrong.

 

Very good.

Your last sentence (bold) is curiously loaded.

Pure atheists should not believe anything with respect to heaven and hell, one way or another, but there are few pure atheists. Most are apostates.

I am an atheist apostate myself. Born/baptized/confirmed Roman Catholic.

Thus, my beliefs have evolved. Or I should say, my beliefs have dropped away.

As an undergraduate student, I would call myself an agnostic. At the time, my conception of hell and heaven went thusly:

Heaven and Hell, if they exist, are in fact the exact same place. Heaven and Hell are the place where one knows oneself, and beholds oneself, in one's entirety, without filters. Those who love themselves and are loved by others bring Heaven to this one place. Those who loathe themselves and are loathed by others bring Hell.
​

Since then, even this blasphemous yet oddly beautiful "belief" has dropped away, and I have settled on the conviction that Heaven and Hell are merely figments of our imagination.

 

Read above. I've already apologized for that post, because you were clearly using the word in the sense used by John in Epistles 1 and 2, as DL pointed out.

 

I have read the Bible from cover to cover including the Apocrypha eight times in seven translations. I read the King James version twice. I also read many books about the Bible. The Bible was written over a period of nearly 1,400 years by many men, and perhaps a few women. These wrote in response to different situations.

The first five books of the Bible are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Jews call these the Torah, or the Law of Moses. These were once attributed to Moses. Now non Fundamentalist scholars believe they were once four different documents which were combined, perhaps during the Babylonian Captivity, which happened from 587–538 BC.

In Who Wrote the Bible? Richard Elliott Friedman explains three of the documents as being composed to advance the fortunes of two families of Israelite high priests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Elliott_Friedman

About three thousand years ago King David defeated the Philistines who lived in what is now Gaza, and conquered Syria and what is now Jordan. This empire began to decline after the reign of David's son Solomon.

The Old Testament prophets blamed the decline and fall of David's Empire on incorrect religious practices, sexual immorality, and on the oppression of the poor by the rich.

The Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls were written by non Christian Jews, but they have more of a Christian feel than the Old Testament, indicating that Christianity was not an abrupt departure from Judaism, but a continuation of more progressive aspects of first century Judaism. Angels play more of a role in the Apocrypha, and the concept is introduced of posthumous rewards and punishments.

In the Dead Sea Scrolls Satan plays more of a role, introducing concepts developed in the book of Revelation, which ends the New Testament.

The New Testament solves the contradiction between believing in one universal God who created the universe, and believing that he only really cares about the Jews. It opens salvation to all peoples. This has lead to the unfortunate practice of persecuting those who reject Christianity, but this practice finds no support in the New Testament.

There are contradictions in the Bible. Most are subtle. It is probably the case that most who have read the Bible in its entirety did not notice them.

 

Bump

 

Although one might reasonably doubt it, due to my screw-up on the Antichrist business, I have read the RSV once, the NEB twice, the "Good News" (Catholic colloquial New Testament) a couple times back in the day (as a Catholic), and of course the Douay. I attempted the Living Bible and the King James, but I couldn't finish them.

I have also read versions of most of the apocryphal and unauthorized gospels (the Gospel of Thomas, for instance), and many Gnostic texts as well - Basilides, Abraxas, and so on.

I do have to admit that in reading the Bible I would always kind of fog out toward the end, and my interest in the Antichrist has always focused on the "ante-" version portrayed in Revelations - i.e., the harbinger of the End of Days. Hence the blunder.

Of all the books of the Bible, I think I have always had a soft spot for Ezekiel. In my early teens, for a time, I was into UFOs, and Ezekiel describes flying saucers with remarkable clarity.

DL, I am impressed by your classical training. Not only your knowledge of the Bible, but also the apparent ease with which you dredge up esoteric bits of ancient Greek culture. What's with that? Are you or have you ever been a teacher?

 

MY PROFOUNDEST COMPLIMENTS

My profoundest compliments to go all who have posted on this thread. There has been absolutely no flaming, or anything other than rational presentation of different views and different quotations from other sources.

I thoroughly realize that there will be people who will believe A as opposed to B and nothing can ever change their mind. However, a rational intelligent person will at least participate in discussions about such matters.

My own views in case I wasn't clear:
I think anyone who wants to legally marry anyone else should have the right to do so in our country. I cannot speak for other countries.

Interesting article maybe beside the point I saw last night in one of the tabloids. A 10yr old girl in Bolivia gave Caesarian birth. The youngest was 5 yrs old that gave birth a few years ago. Apparently in this Indian society, exempt from Bolivian laws as they are sovereign, sex with young children is the norm.

Pedophiles, you now have at least two destinations to practice; Bolivia and Iran, possibly Iraq and also India. I saw the article about the place in India where virgins auction off their virginity by the roadside, supposedly they may be as young as just past puberty.

 

I have about nineteen years of computer programming experience. I have never been a teacher, but I love it when someone asks for my assistance, either at work, or when I am taking a computer class.

Once a boss of mine told me that a programmer he had recently hired told him that I had been mentoring him. My boss told me, "Actually that is my responsibility, but I have a lot of other things to do, so I appreciate what you are doing. You make my job a lot easier." That is about the best thing a boss can say to a subordinate.

In college my major was political science. My minor was journalism. Nevertheless, nearly everything I know about politics, philosophy, history, and even the natural sciences I taught myself.

I like study Bibles. One of my favorite translations is a Roman Catholic translation entitled The New Jerusalem Bible. Years ago I was introduced to The Jerusalem Bible through an left wing Roman Catholic urban commune that had folk masses on Sunday.

The Jerusalem Bible is an English translation of a French translation of the original Hebrew and Greek. The New Jerusalem Bible is a more recent translation in English from the Hebrew and Greek.

In addition to the Bible I have read the major works of ancient Greek and Roman literature in several translations. The convention among the ancient Greek and Latin authors is that serious literature should cover the period from the origin of the world to the immediate aftermath of the Trojan War.

However, they could tell an old story to make a contemporary point. For example, "Tojan Women," by Euripides deals with Trojan civilians after Troy has been destroyed. The Trojan men have been killed. The Trojan women are about to be carried off as slave concubines. During the play the son of Hector, the greatest Trojan warrior, is killed by the orders of Odysseus. Odysseus is portrayed as a coward who fears what Hector's son will do to the Greeks if he lives to manhood.

"The Trojan Women" was written during the the Peloponnesian War, after the Athenians had committed similar atrocities against the Greek island of Milos. Euripides was an Athenian. His play won the prize for tragedy in Athens that year. The atrocities against Melos say bad things about the Athenians. The fact that they could feel enough remorse to give Euripides the prize says good things about them.

Homer's Iliad intrigues me because Homer does not take sides in the Trojan War. One might expect that as a Greek he would portray the Trojans as evil. He portrays the war as an evil conflict fought for morally complex reasons. Greeks who followed him and who wrote about the Trojan War wrote about it the same way.

About nine hundred years after the composition of Homer's Iliad and Odyssey Virgil wrote his Aeneid. This portrays Roman civilization as being established by Trojan refugees who survived the destruction of their city. Greek and Roman authors portrayed heroism and magnificence in defeat.

 

The Epistle of St. James

One of my favorite books in the Bible is the epistle of St. James. St. James was the next oldest brother of Jesus, and the first bishop of Jerusalem. After the Crucifixion St. James worshiped in the Temple of Jerusalem every day until he was martyred by the Sadducees. The Sadducees were upper class Jewish collaborators with the Romans. They were rich men who believed that God rewarded righteousness with wealth. They would have been at home in the Republican Party.

Because of St. James' Jewish piety Pharisees tried to save his life. He may have written the epistle attributed to him, but this is not the scholarly consensus.

Anyway, parts of the Epistle of St. James reads like a socialist tract. Here are portions of it, James 5:1,4-6:

Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you...Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you.

 

WaPost Poll: Gay Marriage Opposition at Record Low

Wednesday, 23 May 2012 09:46 AM
By Henry J. Reske

Opposition to gay marriage is sinking in the wake of President Barack Obama’s endorsement of same-sex unions, with a new Washington Post-ABC News poll showing a record low of 39 percent believe gay marriage should be illegal.

The poll found that 53 percent, also a new record high for the Post poll, believe gay marriage should be legal. Just six years ago only 36 percent thought same-sex unions should be legal.

The poll also found that 59 percent of African-Americans now support gay marriage, up from an average of 41 percent in previous polls.

Obama endorsed same-sex marriage two weeks ago.
http://www.newsmax.com/US/gay-marriage-opposition-poll/2012/05/23/id/439992

Gay marriage, and indeed gay rights, is not an issue I care very much about. I am just glad that this does not seem like an issue that will hurt President Obama in November.

 

WHOA, Now here IS a sick puppy. Second point first : I'm married (nearly 35 years) and the only pain is the fact my darling lady is very ill and MAY not live much longer. Apart from that it's been 35 years of near paradise on earth.

Forgiveness for murder or rape (or violence against a weaker person) ??? Forgiveness freely given AFTER they take some mental realignment - preferably courtesy of a 9mm bullet in the back of the head. NO EXCUSE, NO REDEMPTION.

Gays ?? Do what you like - where ever you like EXCEPT any place close to me. You shouldn't worry about repercussions from a non existent, fictional deity. Be happy and love each other, just not around me.

 

I hope that you have her for as long as possible without it causing her pain, I lost my Love 4 days after her 54th birthday and 2 months, 5 days after our 35th Anniversary.
Let her know how much you Love and appreciate her every moment that you can because when she leaves it's too late and that hurts.

I believe in "Hate the Sin but Love/Forgive The Sinner"
And as for homosexuals live & let live.